Welcome to City-Data.com forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with 1 million other registered members. User profiles and some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your free account you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 15,000 posts/day about local topics and you will see fewer ads.
In fact, the economy under Reagan grew worse for 2 years straight, and during those first two years, Reagan blamed all of the economic problems on Carter. It wasn't until 1983 that things began to get better.
So whine all you want, Obama-haters, there's plenty of time for the economy to get better and for Obama to win a second term.
Who gives a rats ass what happened 21 years ago?
Why is it that you libs always go backwards and dig up stuff that means nothing to any of us today?
The fact is we are in 2009, not 1982 and OBAMA and your LIBERALS CONTROL CONGRESS and they are totally screwing up America.
The topic is comparing 2006 to 2009, Bush and Obama and Rep and Dems for those two years, it is not 1976, 1982 it is 2006 and now.
Face it libs, your boy and your congress it to blame for this mess and all the spending Obama has done made things worse instead of better.
Why is it that you libs always go backwards and dig up stuff that means nothing to any of us today?
The fact is we are in 2009, not 1982 and OBAMA and your LIBERALS CONTROL CONGRESS and they are totally screwing up America.
The topic is comparing 2006 to 2009, Bush and Obama and Rep and Dems for those two years, it is not 1976, 1982 it is 2006 and now.
Face it libs, your boy and your congress it to blame for this mess and all the spending Obama has done made things worse instead of better.
Oh, okay. Yeah, you're right. I must have been crazy to challenge your brilliant wisdom on something as complicated as the American economy. I bet even Alan Greenspan would be envious of your talents.
Yes, Obama should have fixed the economy by now. If only McCain had won, we would now have 0% unemployment and everything in the world would be wonderful.
Location: I currently exist only in a state of mind. one too complex for geographic location.
4,175 posts, read 2,568,002 times
Reputation: 633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefly
Conservatives voted for Bush twice and for a Republican Congress three times.
Call it whatever you wish, but that is all on you. You saw what they were about and kept bringing them back for more.
I never voted for bush. there hasn't been a conservative in the white house since the coolidge administration. the religious nuts did to the republican party what the eco terrorists are doing to the democrat party. this country only functions on true conservative principles.
Status:
"Take America Back 2012"
(set 14 days ago)
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Living in paradise!
10,572 posts, read 5,006,865 times
Reputation: 4013
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale
Oh, okay. Yeah, you're right. I must have been crazy to challenge your brilliant wisdom on something as complicated as the American economy. I bet even Alan Greenspan would be envious of your talents.
Yes, Obama should have fixed the economy by now. If only McCain had won, we would now have 0% unemployment and everything in the world would be wonderful.
McCain did not win, so what does that have to do with anything at all?
The fact is Obama promised himself into a job that was way over his head and promised he would run our country on a budget and fix everything under the sun.
The fact that he has spent us into trillions and nothing to show for it is totally his fault and it is also your lib controlled congress fault for allowing him the change to trash the country and put us in such debt that we may never recover from.
This mess is Obamas and is the liberals fault, like it or not.
McCain did not win, so what does that have to do with anything at all?
The fact is Obama promised himself into a job that was way over his head and promised he would run our country on a budget and fix everything under the sun.
The fact that he has spent us into trillions and nothing to show for it is totally his fault and it is also your lib controlled congress fault for allowing him the change to trash the country and put us in such debt that we may never recover from.
This mess is Obamas and is the liberals fault, like it or not.
As usual, you're right. I bow to your greatness and superiority.
I also just noticed that the unemployment rate consistently went downward while Clinton was president, and as soon as Bush took office, it began to climb back up. But I'm sure that's the fault of Democrats and liberals too, right?
Let me see if I understand now. I'm a Democrat, so you'll have to forgive me - I'm a slow learner. I think the lesson you're trying to teach us is this: When the economy is getting better under Democrats, it's really the Republicans who deserve the credit, and when the economy is getting worse under Republicans, it's really the Democrats who deserve the blame. Do I have it right?
Yes, but it was mostly policies of the Bush Administration and Republicans in Congress that caused the current economic crisis. It was the Bush Administration that refused to regulate the banks, the insurance companies, the subprime mortgage market, the derivatives market etc. In the 90's the commercial banks and the investment banks were separate. The commercial banks got into trading mortgage backed securities, which led them to make loans that they otherwise wouldn't have made, because of Senator Phil Grahm's (a Republican) deregulation bill. Bill Clinton was stupid enough to sign it into law, I'll give you that much.
Meanwhile, corporate globalization (supported by Republicans and moderate Democrats, but by more Republicans then Democrats) have cause many well paying jobs to be shipped overseas and replaced with lower paying service sector jobs. The middle class has been disappearing and wealth inequalities have been growing, which I attribute to corporate globalization and anti-union politics, both ardently supported by Bush and the majority of Republicans. This helped cause the housing bubble. Housing prices rose and rose but salaries didn't rise with it, at least not for the middle and lower classes. This meant that every day less people could afford to buy a house. Supply and demand tells us that when the demand goes down and the supply goes up (which it did since homes were continued being built) the prices go down, which is exactly what happened. The housing crisis is what caused the banks to go under, loss of construction jobs, less disposable income, loss of service sector jobs, and contributed to the collapse of the auto industry. Also, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have caused us to go into massive debt; this money could have been used to create jobs and/or cut taxes even more for the middle and lower classes. Bush's refusal to do anything about health care has led to skyrocketing costs that have put a huge burden on businesses, which doesn't do the least to help create more jobs.
"Bill Clinton was stupid enough to sign it into law, I'll give you that much."
Really? Get back to me when you know what the "working group" was.
"Democrats agreed to support the bill after Republicans agreed to strengthen provisions of the anti-redlining Community Reinvestment Act and address certain privacy concerns; the conference committee then finished its work by the beginning of November.On November 4th, the final bill resolving the differences was passed by the Senate 90-8,and by the House 362-57"
"The middle class has been disappearing and wealth inequalities have been growing, which I attribute to corporate globalization and anti-union politics, both ardently supported by Bush and the majority of Republicans."
I'm in S.E. MI. We have 14.1% unemployment thanks to the UAW and the democrats who have helped them drive industry out of our state with anti-business regulations and business unfriendly taxes. I would consider leaving if I weren't stuck in a house I can't sell. Today houses here are going for about 40% of what they were five years ago. It's not like that in the South were the non-union European and Japanese auto makes operate profitably. In fact, the non-union workers there are earning more money today than their UAW counterparts here because they have been working overtime. Unions destroy jobs and industries.
Welcome to City-Data.com forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with 1 million other registered members. User profiles and some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your free account you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 15,000 posts/day about local topics and you will see fewer ads. 
